ChaseDream

标题: 请教几个比较的问题 [打印本页]

作者: haiwen    时间: 2012-3-30 11:47
标题: 请教几个比较的问题


lTheir diets were more varied than had been supposed.



lModern humans developed much earlier than previously thought.



lThomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours.

请问这三句都是比较状语吗?那么跟划线部分平行的,被比较的对象(状语)是什么呢?多谢


作者: losaohan    时间: 2012-3-30 14:47
同问啊。。我甚至怀疑前两个比较是不是不是状语的比较而是省略了什么成分。。。。我也正在纠结啊!!!求助
作者: losaohan    时间: 2012-3-30 20:17
顶上去。。。
作者: losaohan    时间: 2012-3-31 04:10
不能沉啊。。究竟是怎么个情况啊?
作者: chantal891121    时间: 2012-3-31 06:59
1.than they had been supposed to be
2.than people previously thought they develop
3.Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours
they=Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject
由于to his own time是在过去发生,所以用were,they后面用are因为是现在对我们的影响
当所比较对象所发生的时间不同时,要遵从实际发生时间,对时态进行更改,不可盲目省略助动词

作者: losaohan    时间: 2012-3-31 09:25
1.than they had been supposed to be
2.than people previously thought they develop
3.Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours
they=Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject
由于to his own time是在过去发生,所以用were,they后面用are因为是现在对我们的影响
当所比较对象所发生的时间不同时,要遵从实际发生时间,对时态进行更改,不可盲目省略助动词
-- by 会员 chantal891121 (2012/3/31 6:59:55)


非常非常感谢Chantal童鞋的回复啊。。对于前两个句子,您的意思是不是:比较结构前后的比较对象形式上要对等,然后可以省略掉与前面完全相同或者大家心照不宣的成分呢?例如第一个句子,前后都是S+Be的结构,省略了前后相同的主语和supposed后面to be的不定式;第二个句子,按照您的意思我建议补成than modern humans people previously thought developed的形式,亲给出的句子里they指代不明了,另外比较对象的前后主谓要对等,然后省略了前后相同的主语和谓语,以及大家心照不宣thought的主语people,剩下了previously thought。
以上是我个人的理解,您看对吗?
作者: chantal891121    时间: 2012-3-31 11:48
1.than they had been supposed to be
2.than people previously thought they develop
3.Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours
they=Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject
由于to his own time是在过去发生,所以用were,they后面用are因为是现在对我们的影响
当所比较对象所发生的时间不同时,要遵从实际发生时间,对时态进行更改,不可盲目省略助动词
-- by 会员 chantal891121 (2012/3/31 6:59:55)





非常非常感谢Chantal童鞋的回复啊。。对于前两个句子,您的意思是不是:比较结构前后的比较对象形式上要对等,然后可以省略掉与前面完全相同或者大家心照不宣的成分呢?例如第一个句子,前后都是S+Be的结构,省略了前后相同的主语和supposed后面to be的不定式;第二个句子,按照您的意思我建议补成than modern humans people previously thought developed的形式,亲给出的句子里they指代不明了,另外比较对象的前后主谓要对等,然后省略了前后相同的主语和谓语,以及大家心照不宣thought的主语people,剩下了previously thought。
以上是我个人的理解,您看对吗?
-- by 会员 losaohan (2012/3/31 9:25:39)





在比较结构的省略中(不包括主语比较),首先确定比较对象,若其它部分完全相同,则只保留该成分即可
(注意:若比较对象是介宾短语,介词不能省。例句:John has a higher opinion of Mary than of Jane);
(注意:若比较对象是状语,视情况而定,有些要补上谓语动词,且全部照搬,有些可以只写状语成分(时间状语))

当比较对象是类似于expect\suppose\ought\think等表示主观的谓语动词时,省略主语,保留该动词且形式不变,省略补足成分
,例如第1.2题Their diets were more varied than had been supposed
Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought

当比较对象是主语或者其它谓语时,用助动词do/be/have(完成时)(要注意时态和单复数)补出,不需要加实际动作词;
       句一: John drove much more carefully than Tom did.
若宾语相同,宾语省略  
      句二:Mary has known Peter better than John has (known Peter)
(注意:句一种的did可以省略,也可以不省略,因为主句没有宾语,不会引起歧义
            但是句二中的has不可以省略,因为有宾语peter,省略has会引起歧义)

若其它部分有不同,则省略相同保留不同,若是多重修饰不可跳跃省略

L,如果按照你的意思,应该这么写than people previously thought modern humans developed,they指代modern humans是可以的,因为句子中的代词优先指代句子的主语
作者: losaohan    时间: 2012-3-31 14:31
OMG...不得不说,C兄给出的如此系统的回复让我对比较结构的省略一下子茅塞顿开了!!!
还有一点小小的疑问:
1.上面提到谓语的比较,此时连主语都可以省么?
比如是不是可以这样说:I play basketball better than play football.?
例如新prep218:Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark
, the man-eater of the movies—fewer than have been killed by bee stings. 这儿是不是就是谓语的比较,然后省略了主语people呢?
2.进一步的说,如果上面例子是省略了主语,那么在主语所指的对象不同,谓语也不相同的句子里,即主谓都是比较对象的情况下,如果主语形式上是一样的,这是还可以省略掉主语吗?
因为prep218这个句子里面than前后都是主谓结构,而than后面省略的people和前面的seven people明显不是一拨人啊,只是他们都属于people,而谓语也是不一样的。
我自己写个类似的例子:Three students in our class went to the zoo—fewer than went to zhe park。这个表达对吗?
这个句子里面than后面省略的students 跟前面的students的指代对象就是不同的,而他们形式上都属于students。
也就是说,比较主语的省略不要求指代对象相同,而仅在形式上相同就可以省略了么?
3.如果是比较结构,是不是要求前后严格对应语法功能上相同,指代对象或者语义上对称呢?
例如prep218这句话在笔记中的解释说不能换成than those killed by..,是因为在这儿的比较对象是主谓结构Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark,与those+后置定语这个名词性结构不匹配。
而C兄前面给出的补充形式:
than people previously thought modern humans developed,且不论C兄给出的这句话是主+谓+宾+宾补(那就得用develop,即去掉to的不定式),还是主+谓+宾语从句(貌似要加上that),是无论怎样不是跟than前面主语是modern people develop在前后相同位置上的对象不对称了呢?
如果比较结构要求对称,小弟窃以为认为将people previously thought作为插入语,改成than modern humans people previously thought developed,就能跟前面句子结构一致了。

归纳一下上面的问题,由于状语、介宾以及宾语的比较都相对容易,关键就在谓语不同的主谓结构的比较上
a.如果是主语相同,谓语不同,例如I play basketball better than play football.
b.如果主语所指对象不同,但形式上相同,谓语不相同,例如
Three students in our class went to the zoo—fewer than went to zhe park.
该怎样进行省略呢?我写的例句对吗?
其他主语完全不同,谓语也不相同的情况有必要进行比较吗?如果非要写的话我想直接列出来就可以了吧?例如
I play basketball better than you play football。个人感觉这样的比较没意义啊。
而谓语相同,主语不同的情况,按照C兄说的在没有歧义的情况下直接写出主语,有歧义(例如看成与宾语比较)就写出主语+助动词/情态动词等等。

以及比较结构是否要求严格对称(在考虑了省略部分的情况下)。。。

小弟这几天看比较结构看的有点儿迷糊,还望给予指点迷津啊!万分感激涕零五体投地。。。
PS:偷偷地问一下C兄,你给出的比较结构省略的语法说明条目是你自己总结的吗?还是有出处啊?感觉很好很系统很有帮助,还望告知呀

作者: chantal891121    时间: 2012-3-31 15:55
OMG...不得不说,C兄给出的如此系统的回复让我对比较结构的省略一下子茅塞顿开了!!!
还有一点小小的疑问:
1.上面提到谓语的比较,此时连主语都可以省么?
比如是不是可以这样说:I play basketball better than play football.?
例如新prep218:Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark
, the man-eater of the movies—fewer than have been killed by bee stings. 这儿是不是就是谓语的比较,然后省略了主语people呢?
2.进一步的说,如果上面例子是省略了主语,那么在主语所指的对象不同,谓语也不相同的句子里,即主谓都是比较对象的情况下,如果主语形式上是一样的,这是还可以省略掉主语吗?
因为prep218这个句子里面than前后都是主谓结构,而than后面省略的people和前面的seven people明显不是一拨人啊,只是他们都属于people,而谓语也是不一样的。
我自己写个类似的例子:Three students in our class went to the zoo—fewer than went to zhe park。这个表达对吗?
这个句子里面than后面省略的students 跟前面的students的指代对象就是不同的,而他们形式上都属于students。
也就是说,比较主语的省略不要求指代对象相同,而仅在形式上相同就可以省略了么?
3.如果是比较结构,是不是要求前后严格对应语法功能上相同,指代对象或者语义上对称呢?
例如prep218这句话在笔记中的解释说不能换成than those killed by..,是因为在这儿的比较对象是主谓结构Only seven people this century have been killed by the great white shark,与those+后置定语这个名词性结构不匹配。
而C兄前面给出的补充形式:
than people previously thought modern humans developed,且不论C兄给出的这句话是主+谓+宾+宾补(那就得用develop,即去掉to的不定式),还是主+谓+宾语从句(貌似要加上that),是无论怎样不是跟than前面主语是modern people develop在前后相同位置上的对象不对称了呢?
如果比较结构要求对称,小弟窃以为认为将people previously thought作为插入语,改成than modern humans people previously thought developed,就能跟前面句子结构一致了。

归纳一下上面的问题,由于状语、介宾以及宾语的比较都相对容易,关键就在谓语不同的主谓结构的比较上
a.如果是主语相同,谓语不同,例如I play basketball better than play football.
b.如果主语所指对象不同,但形式上相同,谓语不相同,例如
Three students in our class went to the zoo—fewer than went to zhe park.
该怎样进行省略呢?我写的例句对吗?
其他主语完全不同,谓语也不相同的情况有必要进行比较吗?如果非要写的话我想直接列出来就可以了吧?例如
I play basketball better than you play football。个人感觉这样的比较没意义啊。
而谓语相同,主语不同的情况,按照C兄说的在没有歧义的情况下直接写出主语,有歧义(例如看成与宾语比较)就写出主语+助动词/情态动词等等。

以及比较结构是否要求严格对称(在考虑了省略部分的情况下)。。。

小弟这几天看比较结构看的有点儿迷糊,还望给予指点迷津啊!万分感激涕零五体投地。。。
PS:偷偷地问一下C兄,你给出的比较结构省略的语法说明条目是你自己总结的吗?还是有出处啊?感觉很好很系统很有帮助,还望告知呀
-- by 会员 losaohan (2012/3/31 14:31:21)



你可以先看看我在你帖子上的回答
a.如果是主语相同,谓语不同,例如I play basketball better than play football. 这句话有问题,比较对象是宾语,所以than后面直接跟football
b.如果主语所指对象不同,但形式上相同,谓语不相同,例如
Three students in our class went to the zoo—fewer than went to zhe park.
该怎样进行省略呢?我写的例句对吗?这句话是对的
其他主语完全不同,谓语也不相同的情况有必要进行比较吗?如果非要写的话我想直接列出来就可以了吧?例如
I play basketball better than you play football。个人感觉这样的比较没意义啊。但是这句话是对的
我原本也以为每个比较结构只有一个比较点,后来发现其实可以不只有一个,就像你写的这个例句,是对的。
而谓语相同,主语不同的情况,按照C兄说的在没有歧义的情况下直接写出主语,有歧义(例如看成与宾语比较)就写出主语+助动词/情态动词等等。后面那是写出主语+助动词,没有情态动词。

作者: haiwen    时间: 2012-4-2 10:04
多谢大家的讨论,C兄说的谓语比较,是否可以理解成是谓语成分的比较,即than+比较状语从句修饰谓语,这样就不用特别考究或纠结比较的对象一定要对等,因为对比的可能就是逻辑上面的一个意思?

(1). Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours (for our own time).

这句是不是能理解成表语比较:as disturbing v.s. compelling

(2). Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought. 这句是不是可以补足为:

Modern humans developed much earlier than (they were) previously thought (to develop or would develop). 其实就是than引导一个比较状语从句修饰谓语develop。
作者: reebe    时间: 2012-4-2 10:44
这是篇关于比较从句省略不可多得的好贴,顶了!
作者: chantal891121    时间: 2012-4-2 11:43
多谢大家的讨论,C兄说的谓语比较,是否可以理解成是谓语成分的比较,即than+比较状语从句修饰谓语,这样就不用特别考究或纠结比较的对象一定要对等,因为对比的可能就是逻辑上面的一个意思?

(1). Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours (for our own time).

这句是不是能理解成表语比较:as disturbing v.s. compelling

(2). Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought. 这句是不是可以补足为:

Modern humans developed much earlier than (they were) previously thought (to develop). 其实就是than引导一个比较状语从句修饰谓语develop。
-- by 会员 haiwen (2012/4/2 10:04:46)





因为判断比较对象,就是为了判断出哪些成分能省略哪些成分不能省略,可以用排除法排除掉错误的,也可以自己写成正确的。要是你先还原为比较状语从句,到最后你还是要去判断各个成分省略的可行性,因为这是GMAT中很重要的考点,出比较结构的题考点基本上就是这个。
个人觉得,要是以比较状语从句的思路去做的话,你可能还要先还原句子,就多了一步。
不知道我所描述的你的思路是不是正确,不过我觉得,要是你自己认为这个方法更适合你,还是用自己更好,更得心应手吧!

(1). Thomas Eakins's powerful style and his choices of subject were as disturbing to his own time as they are compelling for ours (for our own time).

这句话,分细点说,有三个比较点,一个是系动词were和are(说它是一个比较点因为前后的时间发生了变化),一个是表语的disturbing和compelling,一个是状语的to his own time和for ours。

(2)Modern humans developed much earlier than previously thought.
解答该句,你可以先看看你问的那个例子
Their diets were more varied than had been supposed
这句话还原是:Their diets were more varied than theyhad been supposedto be

你看我前面有写的:
当比较对象是类似于expect\suppose\ought\think等表示主观的谓语动词时,省略主语,保留该动词且形式不变,省略补足成分

如果原句是你改的这样,
Modern humans developed much earlier than (they were) previously thought (to develop).
省略后就应该是
Modern humans developed much earlier than  were previously thought.

下面这个例子也是一样的道理:
Progress with the building of the bridge was not good as was expected






作者: justinyip    时间: 2012-4-8 17:44
好贴,顶
作者: haiwen    时间: 2012-4-9 03:37
请教一下chantal891121 PREP07里面有一道题:
Scientists have found signs that moving water changed the chemical makeup of the surface of Mars
in recent eras and have therefore concluded that the planet's crust harbors up to three times as much
water as perviously thought.

这句的宾语从句: The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as perviously thought.  如果还原的话应该是什么呢?

如果说是The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as (the crust was) perviously thought 那么was应该不能省略
如果说是The planet's crust harbors up to three times as much water as (scientists) perviously thought  那么as后面的主语sientists和前面的主语crust不一致应该不能省略啊?
作者: haiwen    时间: 2012-4-9 04:30
再请教一个:
To meet the rapidly rising market demand for fish and seafood, suppliers are growing fish twice
as fast as they grow naturally, cutting their feed allotment by nearly half and raising them
on special diets.
prep语法笔记的解释是:正确的表现了原句的逻辑意思,既供应商养殖鱼类的生长速度和鱼类自然生产速度作比
注意:两个比较点这里的grow意思不同,前者是种植(vt),后者是生长(vi),所以是不是可以理解成两个比较点
suppliers vs fish,grow种植 vs grow生长
作者: alicezyk    时间: 2012-9-29 20:54
求解答。。。。。。。。。。。。
作者: alicezyk    时间: 2012-9-29 20:55
求解答~~~~~~~~~~~!




欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) Powered by Discuz! X3.3